PEOPLE OF MI V ROBERT LEONI

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, UNPUBLISHED November 26, 2002 Plaintiff-Appellee, v ROBERT LEONI, a/a/ NICKOLAS RUSSO, a/k/a NEIL MILLER, No. 237043 Wayne Circuit Court LC No. 91-003778-01 Defendant-Appellant. Before: Markey, P.J., and Saad and Smolenski, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Defendant appeals by right his plea-based conviction for larceny from a person, MCL 750.357. We affirm. After entering a no contest plea, defendant failed to appear for sentencing scheduled for June 5, 1991. A bench warrant was issued. After a number of convictions, defendant was returned to Wayne Circuit Court after completing a prison sentence. On June 29, 2001, defendant was sentenced to 5½ to 15 years’ imprisonment, with credit for 1,475 days served on the other charges. On appeal, defendant asserts that the ten-year delay in sentencing violated his right to a speedy trial. Sentencing is included within the speedy trial guarantee. People v McIntosh, 103 Mich App 11, 20; 302 NW2d 321 (1981). In determining whether a defendant’s right to a speedy trial was violated, a four-part balancing test is utilized. The factors considered are: (1) length of delay; (2) reason for the delay; (3) defendant’s assertion of his right; and (4) prejudice to the defendant. Barker v Wingo, 407 US 514, 530; 92 S Ct 2182; 33 L Ed 2d 101 (1972). Although there was a lengthy delay, defendant caused it, and he cannot use it to his advantage. People v Garvin, 159 Mich App 38, 46; 406 NW2d 469 (1987). Where defendant did nothing to demand a more prompt sentencing, and the delay caused no prejudice where defendant was given credit for the time served between the plea and the sentence, there was no -1- speedy trial violation. Id. The lapse of time does not cause a court to lose jurisdiction to sentence a defendant. Id. We affirm. /s/ Jane E. Markey /s/ Henry William Saad /s/ Michael R. Smolenski -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.